Home arrow Archives arrow Events and Issues arrow Events & Issues-2020 arrow Farm Bills:POLITICS OR REFORMS?, By Dr S Saraswathi, 1 October 2020
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
Farm Bills:POLITICS OR REFORMS?, By Dr S Saraswathi, 1 October 2020 Print E-mail

Events & Issues

New Delhi, 1 October 2020

Farm Bills

  POLITICS OR REFORMS?

     By Dr S Saraswathi

        (Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)

 

Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD), the oldest ally of the BJP, has left the NDA after 24 years of partnership in protest against the three Farm Bills passed by Parliament. It is open reversal of its own policy of supporting the Ordinances issued earlier on the subject. SAD is sad that the apprehensions of the farmers are not addressed by the Government. With two members in the Lok Sabha and three in the Rajya Sabha, its exit is no threat to the continuance of the Government. Still, it is a new lesson in party politics.

 

The three bills of 2020 that have created a big uproar and ugly scenes in Parliament include the Farmers Produce, Trade, and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, Agreement on Price Assurance, and Farm Services Bill, and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill. The over-all aim is liberalisation of trade in the farm sector – a logical step in the current economic reforms. The first allows farmers to sell their produce anywhere they like. The second provides a framework for contract farming giving freedom to farmers to enter into contracts with processors, wholesalers, big retailers and exporters at mutually agreed crop prices. The third is pruning the list of essential commodities by removing cereals, pulses, oilseeds, edible oils, onion, and potatoes.

 

The reactions of various political parties to the passing of these Bills are significant more for manifestation of political behaviour than for support for farmers. One can understand the need for discussing the details of the laws, but not wholesale rejection as “anti-farmer”. But in current party politics, rarely an issue is considered on its merits or a party keen on maintaining consistency in its own declared policies. While support may come from independent viewpoint, opposition is invariably built on alliance politics. The crowds gathered to shout against the farm laws rarely represent farmers’ considered free opinion.

 

For some non-NDA parties like the TRS, TMC, and the DMK, it is violation of distribution of legislative powers between the Centre and States. The Congress has directed Chief Ministers of Congress-ruled States to frame their own laws to override the Central farm laws. The NCP and Shiv Sena are also opposed to the bills.        

  

The BJD opposed the two Farm Bills in the Rajya Sabha after supporting them in the Lok Sabha.  It is its first opposition to a legislation of Modi government. It supported even controversial GST, CAA, abolition of triple talaq, and removal of special status for J&K, and demonetisation.     However, it is not wholesale rejection like that of typical Opposition parties. Its hesitation is about protection of farmers’ interests.

 

A joint resolution of the Congress, TMC, SP, TRS, DMK, AAP, RJD, CPM, CPI, Shiv Sena, NCP, and IUML was submitted to the Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu asking him to send the bill to the Select Committee. Ruling parties in many States are concerned about loss of revenue from mandis.

 

Between  two  extreme positions - “Modi’s commitment to farmers” as presented  by Home Minister Amit Shah, and “death warrant for farmers” as depicted by Congress leader, Rahul Gandhi, political  parties are taking sides not solely on their perception of farmers’ interests, but often on political basis. The politics of “opposition dharma” has come into play.

 

The Congress itself promised farm reforms on the lines of the present legislations in its 2019 manifesto. In 2004, the UPA government wanted Congress-ruled States to adopt Model APMC Act 2003 to libralise State agricultural trade laws. It also formulated Model APMC Rules in 2007 for implementing the law. Liberalisation of trade has been in the agenda of the Congress for a long time. But, presently, it cannot support reforms brought by its political opponent. They now look like “cancer and slow poison that will kill farmers and farming”.

  

The party began a nationwide campaign against the bills calling these “anti-farmer, unconstitutional, and in violation of the federal structure”. It seems that staunch allies of the Congress do not examine the Bills and form their own opinion, and make constructive suggestions, if any, for their stand is to go with alliance leader.

 

The Bills are mainly concerned with agricultural marketing. The SAD wants statutory guarantee to protect assured marketing of farmers’ crops at the minimum support price. But, the core committee of the party has also conveyed its protest to what it calls the Centre’s “continued insensitivity towards Punjabi language and issues of Sikh community”. Minority sentiments and communal harmony – both out and out political issues are mixed up with farmers’ economic interests in the decision of the SAD to quit the NDA.

 

A call for “Bharat Bandh” given by a coalition of farmers organisations disrupted normal life in Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh. The Congress government of Punjab is thinking of legal fight against the laws.

 

The SAD has asked Punjab Chief Minister Amarinder Singh to convene a Cabinet meeting immediately and pass an Ordinance to declare the entire State as one market (mandi) to ensure that the new legislations are not enforced in the State. But, the Congress was also said to be responsible for amending the State Agriculture Produce Marketing Act in 2017 to include all the provisions of the Farming Produce Trade and Commerce Ordinance in 2020. The stand of the Punjab Congress has been changing.

 

Under the current system, farmers have to sell their produce at local markets and a guaranteed minimum support price (MSP) is fixed by the State governments. The price may work to the advantage or disadvantage of the farmers. The bills now adopted gives liberty to farmers to sell their products anywhere to anybody without the restriction of selling them only to mandis. Rich middlemen are thriving under present arrangement which outwardly appears to guarantee minimum price to farmers.

 

This step for liberalisation in the farm sector is interpreted by opponents as privatisation of agriculture benefiting only the rich. Instead of devising ways of empowering farmers to make profitable contracts, many State governments want to continue their hold over farmers in the guise of protecting their interests. True, poor farmers may have initial difficulties in learning the tricks of the trade, but experience shows that difficulties are exaggerated. What we have to worry about is the interest of Indian consumers who may face shortage of products because of hoarding and not about farmers who may get the best price.

 

All these are questions to be discussed among all stakeholders and cannot be solved by street protests and on social media. Politics of protests is growing to block every change and every reform. In the place of enlightenment and empowerment which may lead to progress, several parties promise subsidies, freebies, concessions, and protection which forever will keep the poor depending and the backward as backward. A long-term perspective for national development is missing when concentration is on short-term political gains.

 

Agricultural Market Produce Committees (APMS) and MSPs are set to continue. Healthy party politics demands full and fair presentation of facts and resolution of problems by discussion.  Unfortunately, farm bills are made subject of political fight and not economic reform.---INFA

 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

 

 

 

 

 

< Previous   Next >
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT